Apologies if this has already been covered ad nauseam but..wrt to vote swapping surely we are supposed to be voting for the best person, in our opinion, to represent the constituency in which we live. If we exchange votes clearly this isn't happening and local democracy is perverted. Whether it is illegal or not it is showing scant regard for the other constituents, the vast majority of whom are less politically aware than the swappees. If for example the Libs win Twickenham by 1 vote is the person the actual constituents voted for representing the seat? Maybe not.
It is particularly disappointing to see Lib Dems taking part in this kind of thing when they shout so loudly about how well their MP's represent their seats on local matters and rely so much on the goodwill of residents in areas they represent.
Sadly perhaps its not the greatest surprise to see the vast majority of this seems to be occurring within the left leaning section of the electorate. Imagine the shrieks of shrill dismay were the Tories likely to benefit from this. As ever with the left it seems to be ok for them to behave as they wish because they are firstly not the Tories and secondly as usual they are here to save us from ourselves.
Conservatives benefit from swapping their votes in their first home where they live say 48 weeks in a safe Tory seat and use it in their 2nd holiday home in say a marginal Cornish seat but as an outraged rightie you no doubt see nothing wrong with that .
It's news to me that second-home owners are all Conservative voters, yet alone that they all live in safe Conservative seats. You should tell that to all the Labour luvvies (and the Lib Dem ones, if there are any remaining).
Surely voters will only be able to register at one location now with individual registration
Liking the UKIP 4, as long as Thurrock is in there.
Those are horrible figures. SNP can bring the government down at will. LD block ineffective.
What would be worse, is if CON is 5 higher and LAB 5 lower, in which case you have the same situation, except Ed would not have a moral mandate to govern.
It all points in the medium term to being bad for the UK, bad for Labour and great for Scottish Independence.
There are a number of candidates ( Alban, King Charles, King Edward, Beckett) but are there any obscure ones that might fit the bill better? In particular, any female ones?
Saint Sidwell. One benefit being that her feast day is at around the time of the climatologically warmest day of the year, either 31st July, 1st August or 2nd August.
There are a number of candidates ( Alban, King Charles, King Edward, Beckett) but are there any obscure ones that might fit the bill better? In particular, any female ones?
Apologies if this has already been covered ad nauseam but..wrt to vote swapping surely we are supposed to be voting for the best person, in our opinion, to represent the constituency in which we live. If we exchange votes clearly this isn't happening and local democracy is perverted. Whether it is illegal or not it is showing scant regard for the other constituents, the vast majority of whom are less politically aware than the swappees. If for example the Libs win Twickenham by 1 vote is the person the actual constituents voted for representing the seat? Maybe not.
It is particularly disappointing to see Lib Dems taking part in this kind of thing when they shout so loudly about how well their MP's represent their seats on local matters and rely so much on the goodwill of residents in areas they represent.
Sadly perhaps its not the greatest surprise to see the vast majority of this seems to be occurring within the left leaning section of the electorate. Imagine the shrieks of shrill dismay were the Tories likely to benefit from this. As ever with the left it seems to be ok for them to behave as they wish because they are firstly not the Tories and secondly as usual they are here to save us from ourselves.
Conservatives benefit from swapping their votes in their first home where they live say 48 weeks in a safe Tory seat and use it in their 2nd holiday home in say a marginal Cornish seat but as an outraged rightie you no doubt see nothing wrong with that .
The practice is wrong wherever it occurs... At least in the case of these voters they DO have a home in the area they are voting and they DO pay council tax. Try again....
Paying council tax may well entitle you to a vote in council elections but why a general election . Try again with your rightie justification .
Its quite simple really. If you own a house and live in the constituency you are entitled to vote there.
Quite what that has to do with vote swapping is beyond me anyway.
Anyway anything to report from Worthing? Any chance for the kippers in the East? I'm in Littlehampton and expecting them to come second... hoping not though.
"On doorsteps in Nottinghamshire, where I later visited Broxtowe, there was what you could call a woadish worry about Picts or their modern counterparts – the Scots Nats.
I was with Tory candidate Anna Soubry, a fiery old bird who in 2010 took this seat from a ghastly Labour droner called Palmer. He is standing again, even though he pocketed a vast pay-off from the Commons five years ago."
What a nasty post. Tories like you and Quentin Letts are the reason Labour are in with a chance. No one likes shits.
I live in a North-West marginal and by all objective criteria would be expected to be a Tory voter. As a social liberal I quite like Cameron and many of his policies but I will not be voting for them simply for the reason you mention - the unpleasant people that the party attracts.
However much DC tries to detoxify the party they are still stuck with the likes of Lynton Crosby, Rupert Murdoch, Grant Shapp etc. I am sometimes tempted to go blue for economic reasons but half an hour on here serves to remind me why I never could. A number of Tory posters just come across as nasty, heartless individuals, more so than the UKIP posters actually.
Interesting if a little odd. Not sure what Grant Shapps has done to upset you, he seems like a nice enough bloke to me.
By contrast I find that a tory party shorn of a bunch of now-UKIP nutters is much more attractive.
@lucymanning: Ed Miliband says IFS figure of Labour 90bn debt based on assumptions he doesnt accept. Again refused to be specific on when deficit cleared.
"On doorsteps in Nottinghamshire, where I later visited Broxtowe, there was what you could call a woadish worry about Picts or their modern counterparts – the Scots Nats.
I was with Tory candidate Anna Soubry, a fiery old bird who in 2010 took this seat from a ghastly Labour droner called Palmer. He is standing again, even though he pocketed a vast pay-off from the Commons five years ago."
What a nasty post. Tories like you and Quentin Letts are the reason Labour are in with a chance. No one likes shits.
I live in a North-West marginal and by all objective criteria would be expected to be a Tory voter. As a social liberal I quite like Cameron and many of his policies but I will not be voting for them simply for the reason you mention - the unpleasant people that the party attracts.
However much DC tries to detoxify the party they are still stuck with the likes of Lynton Crosby, Rupert Murdoch, Grant Shapp etc. I am sometimes tempted to go blue for economic reasons but half an hour on here serves to remind me why I never could. A number of Tory posters just come across as nasty, heartless individuals, more so than the UKIP posters actually.
I don't think there's anything to choose between the parties in terms of niceness/nastiness.
Liking the UKIP 4, as long as Thurrock is in there.
Those are horrible figures. SNP can bring the government down at will. LD block ineffective.
What would be worse, is if CON is 5 higher and LAB 5 lower, in which case you have the same situation, except Ed would not have a moral mandate to govern.
It all points in the medium term to being bad for the UK, bad for Labour and great for Scottish Independence.
This outcome has been clear for months though and it's not changing.
All that has changed is the seat projections catching up with the vote shares being polled which initially were sticky but now realise it's real and it's about to happen.
Can someone expand the EICIPM acronym for a newbie please?
Ed is crap is PM
Thanks all for the responses. You wouldn't believe how long I've been trying to work that out. I figured it must be something psephological, but obviously underestimed the humour of this forum!
On a different point, anyone care to give me their views on whether I've wasted my money by backing a Lab/SNP/LD coalition at 20-1?
@lucymanning: Ed Miliband says IFS figure of Labour 90bn debt based on assumptions he doesnt accept. Again refused to be specific on when deficit cleared.
Why does the deficit have to be cleared? So long as it can be serviced, what's the problem?
Apologies if this has already been covered ad nauseam but..wrt to vote swapping surely we are supposed to be voting for the best person, in our opinion, to represent the constituency in which we live. If we exchange votes clearly this isn't happening and local democracy is perverted. Whether it is illegal or not it is showing scant regard for the other constituents, the vast majority of whom are less politically aware than the swappees. If for example the Libs win Twickenham by 1 vote is the person the actual constituents voted for representing the seat? Maybe not.
It is particularly disappointing to see Lib Dems taking part in this kind of thing when they shout so loudly about how well their MP's represent their seats on local matters and rely so much on the goodwill of residents in areas they represent.
Sadly perhaps its not the greatest surprise to see the vast majority of this seems to be occurring within the left leaning section of the electorate. Imagine the shrieks of shrill dismay were the Tories likely to benefit from this. As ever with the left it seems to be ok for them to behave as they wish because they are firstly not the Tories and secondly as usual they are here to save us from ourselves.
Conservatives benefit from swapping their votes in their first home where they live say 48 weeks in a safe Tory seat and use it in their 2nd holiday home in say a marginal Cornish seat but as an outraged rightie you no doubt see nothing wrong with that .
The practice is wrong wherever it occurs... At least in the case of these voters they DO have a home in the area they are voting and they DO pay council tax. Try again....
Paying council tax may well entitle you to a vote in council elections but why a general election . Try again with your rightie justification .
Its quite simple really. If you own a house and live in the constituency you are entitled to vote there.
Quite what that has to do with vote swapping is beyond me anyway.
You use an Americanism, Mr Senior is 'butthurt' by the likely erradication of the yellow peril in the SW, and is casting round for a subsection of the electorate to blame. *veers away from obvious Godwin*
That's basically a bet that UKIP get just 1 seat right?
More or less. There are some 2-2 draw possibilities.
And 0-0
Fancy some 20/1 on that?
No - Carswell is 1/50 on - but coverage is coverage..
1/9 actually. Let's all maintain the habit of quoting best prices on here (I noted someone quoting 1/3 NP earlier when best is 4/9).
I'm sure we all remember the horror days of Stuart Dickson posting "drifts" and "plunges" on betfair (usually on no-hopers) that amounted to £2 being offered (not even matched) at a new price...
Labour 'empty paged' by freelancers journal. Just received my copy of the Association of Independent Professionals and the Self Employed (IPSE) magazine. It's an election special with full page articles from all the parties - except Labour. The Labour page is blank except for some small text which includes:
"Despite repeated request, Labour leader Ed Miliband decided not to take up IPSE's offer to outline his views on the UK's 4.5 million self-employed"
@BarryWhiteStuff: @faisalislam: "You're a historian, what's your forecast for the future?" Sir Tom Divine: "The future is not my period." Brilliant! @SkyNews
So we have an economy with record employment, zero inflation, the lowest March borrowing figure since March 2004, the annual borriwng figure coming in well below predictions, record tax receipts etc etc and yet apparently we need to vote Labour to "improve" things.
Does anyone actually believe if Labour/SNP get in then these figures will be "improved" after 5 years.
No.
It's unfathomable how much support the likes of Labour, PC, Green, UKIP, and the SNP have. There are only two parties that actually seem serious about the economy, the Tories and the Lib Dems, and the Lib Dems waver at times. We appear to be about to throw away all of the hard work for a coalition of absolute numpties who have been in denial for the last five years and spout the most ludicrous tripe. I can only conclude the the majority of the British public still does not understand the mess that this country was left in by the Labour Party.
Given how many people think that tuition fees are either paid upfront or represent a "real" debt, you have to say that most people have only vague financial awareness
Can someone expand the EICIPM acronym for a newbie please?
Ed is crap is PM
Thanks all for the responses. You wouldn't believe how long I've been trying to work that out. I figured it must be something psephological, but obviously underestimed the humour of this forum!
On a different point, anyone care to give me their views on whether I've wasted my money by backing a Lab/SNP/LD coalition at 20-1?
Can someone expand the EICIPM acronym for a newbie please?
Ed is crap is PM
Thanks all for the responses. You wouldn't believe how long I've been trying to work that out. I figured it must be something psephological, but obviously underestimed the humour of this forum!
On a different point, anyone care to give me their views on whether I've wasted my money by backing a Lab/SNP/LD coalition at 20-1?
If vote swapping is wrong, then so surely are political parties. They're little more than a vote swapping system on grand scale. With an extra layer of badness since they serve in effect to take away choice from the electorate by forbidding their members to stand against one another.
STV with multimember constituencies permits candidates from the same party to compete against each other.
@lucymanning: Ed Miliband says IFS figure of Labour 90bn debt based on assumptions he doesnt accept. Again refused to be specific on when deficit cleared.
Why does the deficit have to be cleared? So long as it can be serviced, what's the problem?
It depends on your faith in the medium term prospects of the UK economy.
The Tories have little if any belief in the UK economy and view us as having a similar profile to Greece, therefore our debt is too large.
Others see us more similar to the profile of a developed first world economy such as Japan, so the debt is about one quarter of what might conceivably be run up.
"On doorsteps in Nottinghamshire, where I later visited Broxtowe, there was what you could call a woadish worry about Picts or their modern counterparts – the Scots Nats.
I was with Tory candidate Anna Soubry, a fiery old bird who in 2010 took this seat from a ghastly Labour droner called Palmer. He is standing again, even though he pocketed a vast pay-off from the Commons five years ago."
What a nasty post. Tories like you and Quentin Letts are the reason Labour are in with a chance. No one likes shits.
I live in a North-West marginal and by all objective criteria would be expected to be a Tory voter. As a social liberal I quite like Cameron and many of his policies but I will not be voting for them simply for the reason you mention - the unpleasant people that the party attracts.
However much DC tries to detoxify the party they are still stuck with the likes of Lynton Crosby, Rupert Murdoch, Grant Shapp etc. I am sometimes tempted to go blue for economic reasons but half an hour on here serves to remind me why I never could. A number of Tory posters just come across as nasty, heartless individuals, more so than the UKIP posters actually.
I don't think there's anything to choose between the parties in terms of niceness/nastiness.
Actually SF- the UKIP posters on this site come across as far more reasonable than the shrill pbTory brigade. Farage actually comes across as much nicer than the likes of Osborne and Schapps. Reckless and Carswell both appear to be thoroughly decent, much to my amazement. Just an observation.
In case anyone interested in Tower Hamlets - the bribery/ corruption/ intimidation case has now been completed https://twitter.com/TedJeory . Means we will have to wait until the actual election night to get the voting results.
"The story of Lutfur Rahman is a democratic success story. The fact that it seems dodgy to the political and media classes is indicative of how long they've been insulated from anything resembling real democracy."
Can someone expand the EICIPM acronym for a newbie please?
Ed is crap is PM
Thanks all for the responses. You wouldn't believe how long I've been trying to work that out. I figured it must be something psephological, but obviously underestimed the humour of this forum!
On a different point, anyone care to give me their views on whether I've wasted my money by backing a Lab/SNP/LD coalition at 20-1?
Wasted.
They won't be in coalition.
Confidence & supply the only game in town then? I figured there might be a change of heart post election day. They could trot out the same lines as the Dave/Nick rose garden love in about working together in the national interest, stable government in a time of crisis, unity and shared purpose etc etc (ad nauseam). Ho hum.
@lucymanning: Ed Miliband says IFS figure of Labour 90bn debt based on assumptions he doesnt accept. Again refused to be specific on when deficit cleared.
Why does the deficit have to be cleared? So long as it can be serviced, what's the problem?
It depends on your faith in the medium term prospects of the UK economy.
The Tories have little if any belief in the UK economy and view us as having a similar profile to Greece, therefore our debt is too large.
Others see us more similar to the profile of a developed first world economy such as Japan, so the debt is about one quarter of what might conceivably be run up.
It's people like you (and IA) who caused the had-to-be-enforced austerity we've all had to suffer. The lack of self-awareness is staggering.
@lucymanning: Ed Miliband says IFS figure of Labour 90bn debt based on assumptions he doesnt accept. Again refused to be specific on when deficit cleared.
Why does the deficit have to be cleared? So long as it can be serviced, what's the problem?
The problem is that the increasing debt interest means that funds are diverted from the NHS to pay it. The UK can 'service' a lot of debt - but it means that the standard of living goes down.
@lucymanning: Ed Miliband says IFS figure of Labour 90bn debt based on assumptions he doesnt accept. Again refused to be specific on when deficit cleared.
Why does the deficit have to be cleared? So long as it can be serviced, what's the problem?
It depends on your faith in the medium term prospects of the UK economy.
The Tories have little if any belief in the UK economy and view us as having a similar profile to Greece, therefore our debt is too large.
Others see us more similar to the profile of a developed first world economy such as Japan, so the debt is about one quarter of what might conceivably be run up.
That's basically a bet that UKIP get just 1 seat right?
More or less. There are some 2-2 draw possibilities.
And 0-0
Fancy some 20/1 on that?
No - Carswell is 1/50 on - but coverage is coverage..
1/9 actually. Let's all maintain the habit of quoting best prices on here (I noted someone quoting 1/3 NP earlier when best is 4/9).
I'm sure we all remember the horror days of Stuart Dickson posting "drifts" and "plunges" on betfair (usually on no-hopers) that amounted to £2 being offered (not even matched) at a new price...
I remember once I threw a tenner on Boris on Betfair and the lack of liquidity moved his odds sharply in sparking Mike to throw up a sudden Saturday lead suggesting there was a new poll out.
"On doorsteps in Nottinghamshire, where I later visited Broxtowe, there was what you could call a woadish worry about Picts or their modern counterparts – the Scots Nats.
I was with Tory candidate Anna Soubry, a fiery old bird who in 2010 took this seat from a ghastly Labour droner called Palmer. He is standing again, even though he pocketed a vast pay-off from the Commons five years ago."
What a nasty post. Tories like you and Quentin Letts are the reason Labour are in with a chance. No one likes shits.
I live in a North-West marginal and by all objective criteria would be expected to be a Tory voter. As a social liberal I quite like Cameron and many of his policies but I will not be voting for them simply for the reason you mention - the unpleasant people that the party attracts.
However much DC tries to detoxify the party they are still stuck with the likes of Lynton Crosby, Rupert Murdoch, Grant Shapp etc. I am sometimes tempted to go blue for economic reasons but half an hour on here serves to remind me why I never could. A number of Tory posters just come across as nasty, heartless individuals, more so than the UKIP posters actually.
I don't think there's anything to choose between the parties in terms of niceness/nastiness.
The voters seem to think there is, illogical or not. It's why the Conservatives tend to struggle more than Labour in winning over and retaining support.
This will probably help the SNP. The IFS saying their plans will lead to longer austerity will help the SNP. The SNP changing their name so that the N stands for "Nazi" would help the SNP. Everything helps the SNP
Can someone expand the EICIPM acronym for a newbie please?
Ed is crap is PM
Thanks all for the responses. You wouldn't believe how long I've been trying to work that out. I figured it must be something psephological, but obviously underestimed the humour of this forum!
On a different point, anyone care to give me their views on whether I've wasted my money by backing a Lab/SNP/LD coalition at 20-1?
Wasted.
They won't be in coalition.
Confidence & supply the only game in town then? I figured there might be a change of heart post election day. They could trot out the same lines as the Dave/Nick rose garden love in about working together in the national interest, stable government in a time of crisis, unity and shared purpose etc etc (ad nauseam). Ho hum.
I'm on the same bet. I guess it could revive when they all start talking but 20-1 is too short at any rate for this.
I assume you placed it before the Ed Mili speech ruling out formal arrangements like me :E ?
"The story of Lutfur Rahman is a democratic success story. The fact that it seems dodgy to the political and media classes is indicative of how long they've been insulated from anything resembling real democracy."
So we have an economy with record employment, zero inflation, the lowest March borrowing figure since March 2004, the annual borriwng figure coming in well below predictions, record tax receipts etc etc and yet apparently we need to vote Labour to "improve" things.
Does anyone actually believe if Labour/SNP get in then these figures will be "improved" after 5 years.
Its cos we don't want 5 more yrs of cuts thanks.
Said at the time the tories blew it at the budget. Should've also given something back & showed they understand and care about working class people.
@lucymanning: Ed Miliband says IFS figure of Labour 90bn debt based on assumptions he doesnt accept. Again refused to be specific on when deficit cleared.
Why does the deficit have to be cleared? So long as it can be serviced, what's the problem?
It depends on your faith in the medium term prospects of the UK economy.
The Tories have little if any belief in the UK economy and view us as having a similar profile to Greece, therefore our debt is too large.
Others see us more similar to the profile of a developed first world economy such as Japan, so the debt is about one quarter of what might conceivably be run up.
It's people like you (and IA) who caused the had-to-be-enforced austerity we've all had to suffer. The lack of self-awareness is staggering.
The most economically literate way of debt reduction is to inflate it down over time. Period. Repaying debt from cuts makes no economic sense and is not credible UNLESS the economy is threatened by the debt level.
The only way anyone can see that as relevant to the UK is if they see it's economic strength as being that of Greece in the short and medium term. Obviously there are other issues long term for the UK but they do not impact on the necessity or otherwise of cut based debt reduction.
@lucymanning: Ed Miliband says IFS figure of Labour 90bn debt based on assumptions he doesnt accept. Again refused to be specific on when deficit cleared.
Why does the deficit have to be cleared? So long as it can be serviced, what's the problem?
The problem is that the increasing debt interest means that funds are diverted from the NHS to pay it. The UK can 'service' a lot of debt - but it means that the standard of living goes down.
Increasing debt as a proportion of GDP would mean that.
Can someone expand the EICIPM acronym for a newbie please?
Ed is crap is PM
Thanks all for the responses. You wouldn't believe how long I've been trying to work that out. I figured it must be something psephological, but obviously underestimed the humour of this forum!
On a different point, anyone care to give me their views on whether I've wasted my money by backing a Lab/SNP/LD coalition at 20-1?
Wasted.
They won't be in coalition.
Confidence & supply the only game in town then? I figured there might be a change of heart post election day. They could trot out the same lines as the Dave/Nick rose garden love in about working together in the national interest, stable government in a time of crisis, unity and shared purpose etc etc (ad nauseam). Ho hum.
I'm on the same bet. I guess it could revive when they all start talking but 20-1 is too short at any rate for this.
I assume you placed it before the Ed Mili speech ruling out formal arrangements like me :E ?
I started pricing up betfair's coalition market, then realised that with such a high chance of a void it wasn't worth my time.
I'm left with a single bet of £2 on con/lab coalition @ 99/1.
So we have an economy with record employment, zero inflation, the lowest March borrowing figure since March 2004, the annual borriwng figure coming in well below predictions, record tax receipts etc etc and yet apparently we need to vote Labour to "improve" things.
Does anyone actually believe if Labour/SNP get in then these figures will be "improved" after 5 years.
No.
It's unfathomable how much support the likes of Labour, PC, Green, UKIP, and the SNP have. There are only two parties that actually seem serious about the economy, the Tories and the Lib Dems, and the Lib Dems waver at times. We appear to be about to throw away all of the hard work for a coalition of absolute numpties who have been in denial for the last five years and spout the most ludicrous tripe. I can only conclude the the majority of the British public still does not understand the mess that this country was left in by the Labour Party.
Given how many people think that tuition fees are either paid upfront or represent a "real" debt, you have to say that most people have only vague financial awareness
Don't get me started. That's got to be one of the least understood issues going. It actually works out a bit like a very progressive and capped tax. Ed's brilliant plan will make it much less progressive, effectively giving a big cut to the wealthiest graduates. And a true graduate tax, should that come to pass, would probably result in most graduates paying a lot more.
Obviously most people would like to go to uni for "free", but the current settlement isn't that bad given the viable alternatives.
"The story of Lutfur Rahman is a democratic success story. The fact that it seems dodgy to the political and media classes is indicative of how long they've been insulated from anything resembling real democracy."
However much DC tries to detoxify the party they are still stuck with the likes of Lynton Crosby, Rupert Murdoch, Grant Shapp etc. .
Grant Shapp nasty? Really?
And I suppose you do realise that Rupert Murdoch has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the Conservative Party? He was, however, a very prominent and influential supporter of the Labour Party. So why do you not regard Labour as the 'nasty party', by your own twisted logic?
Or, to put it another way: you have worked backwards from your irrational prejudice to create myths to support it.
Intimidation at polling stations: Mawrey says police could be said to be like three wise monkeys at polling stations. They did nothing
This vindicates everything Councillor Peter Golds has been saying for years.
When he complained to the police about voter intimidation, he got the response "It's a cultural matter."
Is this what you meant, Sean, when you said that you felt corruption (but no bribery) was endemic in this country yesterday?
I must say, I found that very depressing. I'd much rather not believe that to be the case. People do turn the other cheek and make excuses to themselves for not intervening, but are we worse than any other country for that?
Obviously, that alone is unacceptable. Particularly the way child abuse, forced marriage, genital mutualation and human trafficking goes on right under our noses, with many not lifting a finger.
I've no view on vote-swapping. I wouldn't do it myself and can't offer it because East Ham isn't a hyper-marginal (or indeed any other kind of marginal).
Yet I understand why people do it.
Two weeks today, I will vote Liberal Democrat and while my vote will be counted, it will not count. It will have no bearing whatsoever on the formation of the next House of Commons or the next Government of my country.
The ludicrous anachronism that is the current system of contrived geographical accident and tradition means that in certain places your vote is actively courted while in most it is ignored.
The concept that a Party's presence in the legislature should be an accurate reflection of the number of people voting for it seems so obvious I cannot understand why anyone is opposed to it. Now, there are those who claim proportionality is the route to instability and cite various countries where that has happened.
Granted but Britain isn't Israel - the British political tradition and culture would adapt as easily to PR as it would to the various technological, cultural and social changes which we have undergone in the past 200 years. There would be a recognisable centre-right bloc of parties and a recognisable centre-left bloc with some parties sitting outside the blocs.
The current system suits both Conservative and Labour parties who will gain more than 90% of the seats on barely 70% of the vote. It might even work well for the LDs this time but won't help UKIP. None of that makes it right - Nick Clegg was wrong to offer AV, an equally disproportional system which had and has never been LD policy. I understand why he did it but it was politically inept and a bad decision.
There are plenty of systems out there (some better than others) and whether you want the New Zealand system or the system used for the GLA or the German system with a threshold or something else is a topic for debate but the principal factor for me must be that in a democracy every vote must be counted and must count.
One major success for Labour in this campaign is an astounding ability to hide most of the shadow front bench from the media. If they are elected I suspect they will be the least recognisable government ever.
Liking the UKIP 4, as long as Thurrock is in there.
Those are horrible figures. SNP can bring the government down at will. LD block ineffective.
What would be worse, is if CON is 5 higher and LAB 5 lower, in which case you have the same situation, except Ed would not have a moral mandate to govern.
It all points in the medium term to being bad for the UK, bad for Labour and great for Scottish Independence.
This outcome has been clear for months though and it's not changing.
All that has changed is the seat projections catching up with the vote shares being polled which initially were sticky but now realise it's real and it's about to happen.
"The story of Lutfur Rahman is a democratic success story. The fact that it seems dodgy to the political and media classes is indicative of how long they've been insulated from anything resembling real democracy."
It's up there with Sion Simon's "Labour Will Increase Their Majority."
It's also up there with the Guardian's attempts to rubbish the Times reports on child abuse in Rotherham.
Intimidation at polling stations: Mawrey says police could be said to be like three wise monkeys at polling stations. They did nothing
This vindicates everything Councillor Peter Golds has been saying for years.
When he complained to the police about voter intimidation, he got the response "It's a cultural matter."
Is this what you meant, Sean, when you said that you felt corruption (but no bribery) was endemic in this country yesterday?
I must say, I found that very depressing. I'd much rather not believe that to be the case. People do turn the other cheek and make excuses to themselves for not intervening, but are we worse than any other country for that?
Obviously, that alone is unacceptable. Particularly the way child abuse, forced marriage, genital mutualation and human trafficking goes on right under our noses, with many not lifting a finger.
You can back Harriet Harman to be next deputy Prime Minister at 7/1 with Paddy Power. While Ed Miliband might not have a deputy Prime Minister, I cannot see how he could choose anyone else if there is a Labour minority government, given that she is the elected deputy leader.
Given that Labour minority is currently trading at 2.6 or so on Betfair, this looks like a good bet to me.
So we have an economy with record employment, zero inflation, the lowest March borrowing figure since March 2004, the annual borriwng figure coming in well below predictions, record tax receipts etc etc and yet apparently we need to vote Labour to "improve" things.
Does anyone actually believe if Labour/SNP get in then these figures will be "improved" after 5 years.
No.
It's unfathomable how much support the likes of Labour, PC, Green, UKIP, and the SNP have. There are only two parties that actually seem serious about the economy, the Tories and the Lib Dems, and the Lib Dems waver at times. We appear to be about to throw away all of the hard work for a coalition of absolute numpties who have been in denial for the last five years and spout the most ludicrous tripe. I can only conclude the the majority of the British public still does not understand the mess that this country was left in by the Labour Party.
It still amazes me how many people still think the Gordon Brown, whilst a bit ropey as a PM, was an excellent chancellor.
You can back Harriet Harman to be next deputy Prime Minister at 7/1 with Paddy Power. While Ed Miliband might not have a deputy Prime Minister, I cannot see how he could choose anyone else if there is a Labour minority government, given that she is the elected deputy leader.
Given that Labour minority is currently trading at 2.6 or so on Betfair, this looks like a good bet to me.
Given Clegg was DPM - is the likelyhood not that Eck is DPM ?
However much DC tries to detoxify the party they are still stuck with the likes of Lynton Crosby, Rupert Murdoch, Grant Shapp etc. .
Grant Shapp nasty? Really?
And I suppose you do realise that Rupert Murdoch has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the Conservative Party? He was, however, a very prominent and influential supporter of the Labour Party. So why do you not regard Labour as the 'nasty party', by your own twisted logic?
Or, to put it another way: you have worked backwards from your irrational prejudice to create myths to support it.
I don't think Shapps is nasty, he just seems very slimy. If Spitting Image were still going I suspect the Kenneth Baker Slug would have been replaced by the Grant Shapp's one.
The Kenneth Baker slug was probably the rudest (and funniest) Spitting Image puppet. I bet he hated it.
"The story of Lutfur Rahman is a democratic success story. The fact that it seems dodgy to the political and media classes is indicative of how long they've been insulated from anything resembling real democracy."
It's up there with Sion Simon's "Labour Will Increase Their Majority."
@lucymanning: Ed Miliband says IFS figure of Labour 90bn debt based on assumptions he doesnt accept. Again refused to be specific on when deficit cleared.
Why does the deficit have to be cleared? So long as it can be serviced, what's the problem?
It depends on your faith in the medium term prospects of the UK economy.
The Tories have little if any belief in the UK economy and view us as having a similar profile to Greece, therefore our debt is too large.
Others see us more similar to the profile of a developed first world economy such as Japan, so the debt is about one quarter of what might conceivably be run up.
The reality, I suspect, is somewhere in between.
In any event, the economic prospects of either country are not to be envied, although the collapse of the Japanese economy will be played over a much longer time period
You can back Harriet Harman to be next deputy Prime Minister at 7/1 with Paddy Power. While Ed Miliband might not have a deputy Prime Minister, I cannot see how he could choose anyone else if there is a Labour minority government, given that she is the elected deputy leader.
Given that Labour minority is currently trading at 2.6 or so on Betfair, this looks like a good bet to me.
Given Clegg was DPM - is the likelyhood not that Eck is DPM ?
You can back Harriet Harman to be next deputy Prime Minister at 7/1 with Paddy Power. While Ed Miliband might not have a deputy Prime Minister, I cannot see how he could choose anyone else if there is a Labour minority government, given that she is the elected deputy leader.
Given that Labour minority is currently trading at 2.6 or so on Betfair, this looks like a good bet to me.
Given Clegg was DPM - is the likelyhood not that Eck is DPM ?
I share Pulpstar's views on the likelihood of a formal Labour/SNP coalition. And I'm only interested in formalities for this bet.
@lucymanning: Ed Miliband says IFS figure of Labour 90bn debt based on assumptions he doesnt accept. Again refused to be specific on when deficit cleared.
Why does the deficit have to be cleared? So long as it can be serviced, what's the problem?
It depends on your faith in the medium term prospects of the UK economy.
The Tories have little if any belief in the UK economy and view us as having a similar profile to Greece, therefore our debt is too large.
Others see us more similar to the profile of a developed first world economy such as Japan, so the debt is about one quarter of what might conceivably be run up.
It's people like you (and IA) who caused the had-to-be-enforced austerity we've all had to suffer. The lack of self-awareness is staggering.
The most economically literate way of debt reduction is to inflate it down over time. Period. Repaying debt from cuts makes no economic sense and is not credible UNLESS the economy is threatened by the debt level.
The only way anyone can see that as relevant to the UK is if they see it's economic strength as being that of Greece in the short and medium term. Obviously there are other issues long term for the UK but they do not impact on the necessity or otherwise of cut based debt reduction.
I have no problem with the UK having debt per se. However, a few points which shape my view of this: 1) Inflating it down requires that the deficit is below the amount at which the debt falls in real terms. 2) The deficit should be at a level which enables it to withstand shocks without ballooning out of control. 3) This implies (to me) that there should not be a structural deficit. As we've seen, this makes responding to a shock very painful. 4) Having a structural deficit, and moving to eliminate it, requires cuts. Period.
"The story of Lutfur Rahman is a democratic success story. The fact that it seems dodgy to the political and media classes is indicative of how long they've been insulated from anything resembling real democracy."
It's up there with Sion Simon's "Labour Will Increase Their Majority."
You can back Harriet Harman to be next deputy Prime Minister at 7/1 with Paddy Power. While Ed Miliband might not have a deputy Prime Minister, I cannot see how he could choose anyone else if there is a Labour minority government, given that she is the elected deputy leader.
Given that Labour minority is currently trading at 2.6 or so on Betfair, this looks like a good bet to me.
@euanmccolm: for a long time, the snp line is "we don't know who these anonymous trolls are" but neil hay is a parliamentary candidate, for heaven's sake
Game changer on three year old tweets - I think not.
Certainly not on the basis of the First Minister's Questions I have just seen on the Parliament programme when Sturgeon totally and comprehensively destroyed Dugdale (Murphy's Deputy) on that issue - and indeed on the difference between "austerity" (the reduction in borrowing) and "public spending" over the next financial period.
So we have an economy with record employment, zero inflation, the lowest March borrowing figure since March 2004, the annual borriwng figure coming in well below predictions, record tax receipts etc etc and yet apparently we need to vote Labour to "improve" things.
Does anyone actually believe if Labour/SNP get in then these figures will be "improved" after 5 years.
Its cos we don't want 5 more yrs of cuts thanks.
Said at the time the tories blew it at the budget. Should've also given something back & showed they understand and care about working class people.
Did the hike of the personal allowance by nearly 50% not achieve that (although as the Lib Dems correctly point out, it was their policy).
"On doorsteps in Nottinghamshire, where I later visited Broxtowe, there was what you could call a woadish worry about Picts or their modern counterparts – the Scots Nats.
I was with Tory candidate Anna Soubry, a fiery old bird who in 2010 took this seat from a ghastly Labour droner called Palmer. He is standing again, even though he pocketed a vast pay-off from the Commons five years ago."
What a nasty post. Tories like you and Quentin Letts are the reason Labour are in with a chance. No one likes shits.
I live in a North-West marginal and by all objective criteria would be expected to be a Tory voter. As a social liberal I quite like Cameron and many of his policies but I will not be voting for them simply for the reason you mention - the unpleasant people that the party attracts.
However much DC tries to detoxify the party they are still stuck with the likes of Lynton Crosby, Rupert Murdoch, Grant Shapp etc. I am sometimes tempted to go blue for economic reasons but half an hour on here serves to remind me why I never could. A number of Tory posters just come across as nasty, heartless individuals, more so than the UKIP posters actually.
Damian McBride, Peter Mandelson, lord of the dark arts and Alastair Campbell are nice then??
@lucymanning: Ed Miliband says IFS figure of Labour 90bn debt based on assumptions he doesnt accept. Again refused to be specific on when deficit cleared.
Why does the deficit have to be cleared? So long as it can be serviced, what's the problem?
It depends on your faith in the medium term prospects of the UK economy.
The Tories have little if any belief in the UK economy and view us as having a similar profile to Greece, therefore our debt is too large.
Others see us more similar to the profile of a developed first world economy such as Japan, so the debt is about one quarter of what might conceivably be run up.
It's people like you (and IA) who caused the had-to-be-enforced austerity we've all had to suffer. The lack of self-awareness is staggering.
The most economically literate way of debt reduction is to inflate it down over time. Period. Repaying debt from cuts makes no economic sense and is not credible UNLESS the economy is threatened by the debt level.
The only way anyone can see that as relevant to the UK is if they see it's economic strength as being that of Greece in the short and medium term. Obviously there are other issues long term for the UK but they do not impact on the necessity or otherwise of cut based debt reduction.
I have no problem with the UK having debt per se. However, a few points which shape my view of this: 1) Inflating it down requires that the deficit is below the amount at which the debt falls in real terms. 2) The deficit should be at a level which enables it to withstand shocks without ballooning out of control. 3) This implies (to me) that there should not be a structural deficit. As we've seen, this makes responding to a shock very painful. 4) Having a structural deficit, and moving to eliminate it, requires cuts. Period.
I don't have a huge disagreement with any of your points other than the last. A structural deficit can be eliminated through growing your tax base with no change to (or small increases in) spending. I.e. the SNP plan which seems to be best received by the IFS.
The Tax Free Allowance increase has to be the most economically illiterate act of any government in my lifetime. Not to mention the moral impact on so many more people getting representation without (income) taxation.
You can back Harriet Harman to be next deputy Prime Minister at 7/1 with Paddy Power. While Ed Miliband might not have a deputy Prime Minister, I cannot see how he could choose anyone else if there is a Labour minority government, given that she is the elected deputy leader.
Given that Labour minority is currently trading at 2.6 or so on Betfair, this looks like a good bet to me.
Absolutely. Not worth Ed's bother to abolish the position either.
I've no view on vote-swapping. I wouldn't do it myself and can't offer it because East Ham isn't a hyper-marginal (or indeed any other kind of marginal).
Yet I understand why people do it.
Two weeks today, I will vote Liberal Democrat and while my vote will be counted, it will not count. It will have no bearing whatsoever on the formation of the next House of Commons or the next Government of my country.
The ludicrous anachronism that is the current system of contrived geographical accident and tradition means that in certain places your vote is actively courted while in most it is ignored.
The concept that a Party's presence in the legislature should be an accurate reflection of the number of people voting for it seems so obvious I cannot understand why anyone is opposed to it. Now, there are those who claim proportionality is the route to instability and cite various countries where that has happened.
Granted but Britain isn't Israel - the British political tradition and culture would adapt as easily to PR as it would to the various technological, cultural and social changes which we have undergone in the past 200 years. There would be a recognisable centre-right bloc of parties and a recognisable centre-left bloc with some parties sitting outside the blocs.
The current system suits both Conservative and Labour parties who will gain more than 90% of the seats on barely 70% of the vote. It might even work well for the LDs this time but won't help UKIP. None of that makes it right - Nick Clegg was wrong to offer AV, an equally disproportional system which had and has never been LD policy. I understand why he did it but it was politically inept and a bad decision.
There are plenty of systems out there (some better than others) and whether you want the New Zealand system or the system used for the GLA or the German system with a threshold or something else is a topic for debate but the principal factor for me must be that in a democracy every vote must be counted and must count.
There is something pernicious about a system which, for the majority of electors, the only thing that changes - perhaps in their entire lifetime - is when they are offered a new "closed list of one" by the incumbent party in their constituency.
And there is something disturbing about a system wherein, since 2005, the majority of those who vote elect no-one...
You can back Harriet Harman to be next deputy Prime Minister at 7/1 with Paddy Power. While Ed Miliband might not have a deputy Prime Minister, I cannot see how he could choose anyone else if there is a Labour minority government, given that she is the elected deputy leader.
Given that Labour minority is currently trading at 2.6 or so on Betfair, this looks like a good bet to me.
Absolutely. Not worth Ed's bother to abolish the position either.
Bear in mind PP appear to have Damien McBride on their payroll - you could be betting against inside info.
Comments
What would be worse, is if CON is 5 higher and LAB 5 lower, in which case you have the same situation, except Ed would not have a moral mandate to govern.
It all points in the medium term to being bad for the UK, bad for Labour and great for Scottish Independence.
Was a joke. Betfair seems to be taking it quite seriously.
Quite what that has to do with vote swapping is beyond me anyway.
Anyway anything to report from Worthing? Any chance for the kippers in the East? I'm in Littlehampton and expecting them to come second... hoping not though.
By contrast I find that a tory party shorn of a bunch of now-UKIP nutters is much more attractive.
Scott_P
Osborne can open up as many fronts as he likes. The Tory campaign is running into the sands and the SNP one running away with the election.
Sir Tom Devine, Scotland's most repected historian says that "the future is not my period" but then calls the election for the SNP!
Sadly the double is impermissible.
When he complained to the police about voter intimidation, he got the response "It's a cultural matter."
All that has changed is the seat projections catching up with the vote shares being polled which initially were sticky but now realise it's real and it's about to happen.
On a different point, anyone care to give me their views on whether I've wasted my money by backing a Lab/SNP/LD coalition at 20-1?
He must view Scottish Independence as a block to his wish for Chinese hegemony. Bizarre to work out why he thinks that way.
I'm sure we all remember the horror days of Stuart Dickson posting "drifts" and "plunges" on betfair (usually on no-hopers) that amounted to £2 being offered (not even matched) at a new price...
If you want to make money, always follow @Tissue_Price tips.
Just received my copy of the Association of Independent Professionals and the Self Employed (IPSE) magazine. It's an election special with full page articles from all the parties - except Labour. The Labour page is blank except for some small text which includes:
"Despite repeated request, Labour leader Ed Miliband decided not to take up IPSE's offer to outline his views on the UK's 4.5 million self-employed"
Me "Sir Tom Devine, Scotland's most repected historian2
You "He's no Niall Ferguson"
Me "That's why he is the most respected"
They won't be in coalition.
The Tories have little if any belief in the UK economy and view us as having a similar profile to Greece, therefore our debt is too large.
Others see us more similar to the profile of a developed first world economy such as Japan, so the debt is about one quarter of what might conceivably be run up.
http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/snp-candidate-sorry-over-twitter-trolling-1-3751958
"The story of Lutfur Rahman is a democratic success story. The fact that it seems dodgy to the political and media classes is indicative of how long they've been insulated from anything resembling real democracy."
I assume you placed it before the Ed Mili speech ruling out formal arrangements like me :E ?
Said at the time the tories blew it at the budget. Should've also given something back & showed they understand and care about working class people.
The only way anyone can see that as relevant to the UK is if they see it's economic strength as being that of Greece in the short and medium term. Obviously there are other issues long term for the UK but they do not impact on the necessity or otherwise of cut based debt reduction.
I'm left with a single bet of £2 on con/lab coalition @ 99/1.
Obviously most people would like to go to uni for "free", but the current settlement isn't that bad given the viable alternatives.
And I suppose you do realise that Rupert Murdoch has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the Conservative Party? He was, however, a very prominent and influential supporter of the Labour Party. So why do you not regard Labour as the 'nasty party', by your own twisted logic?
Or, to put it another way: you have worked backwards from your irrational prejudice to create myths to support it.
I must say, I found that very depressing. I'd much rather not believe that to be the case. People do turn the other cheek and make excuses to themselves for not intervening, but are we worse than any other country for that?
Obviously, that alone is unacceptable. Particularly the way child abuse, forced marriage, genital mutualation and human trafficking goes on right under our noses, with many not lifting a finger.
I've no view on vote-swapping. I wouldn't do it myself and can't offer it because East Ham isn't a hyper-marginal (or indeed any other kind of marginal).
Yet I understand why people do it.
Two weeks today, I will vote Liberal Democrat and while my vote will be counted, it will not count. It will have no bearing whatsoever on the formation of the next House of Commons or the next Government of my country.
The ludicrous anachronism that is the current system of contrived geographical accident and tradition means that in certain places your vote is actively courted while in most it is ignored.
The concept that a Party's presence in the legislature should be an accurate reflection of the number of people voting for it seems so obvious I cannot understand why anyone is opposed to it. Now, there are those who claim proportionality is the route to instability and cite various countries where that has happened.
Granted but Britain isn't Israel - the British political tradition and culture would adapt as easily to PR as it would to the various technological, cultural and social changes which we have undergone in the past 200 years. There would be a recognisable centre-right bloc of parties and a recognisable centre-left bloc with some parties sitting outside the blocs.
The current system suits both Conservative and Labour parties who will gain more than 90% of the seats on barely 70% of the vote. It might even work well for the LDs this time but won't help UKIP. None of that makes it right - Nick Clegg was wrong to offer AV, an equally disproportional system which had and has never been LD policy. I understand why he did it but it was politically inept and a bad decision.
There are plenty of systems out there (some better than others) and whether you want the New Zealand system or the system used for the GLA or the German system with a threshold or something else is a topic for debate but the principal factor for me must be that in a democracy every vote must be counted and must count.
http://moneyweek.com/election-2015-its-what-the-bookies-say-that-really-matters/
It's also up there with the Guardian's attempts to rubbish the Times reports on child abuse in Rotherham.
Given that Labour minority is currently trading at 2.6 or so on Betfair, this looks like a good bet to me.
The Kenneth Baker slug was probably the rudest (and funniest) Spitting Image puppet. I bet he hated it.
Well knock me down with a feather
In any event, the economic prospects of either country are not to be envied, although the collapse of the Japanese economy will be played over a much longer time period
Punters could do worse than taking corals 6/4 on the next royal baby being a boy. If you can't get on with coral, bet365 will oblige....
If you'd have believed the betting markets back in July 2013, Prince George should have been Princess Alexandra.
At your own risk etc etc.
Reckless getting feisty, Creasy resorting to the 'you ok Hun?' Tactic that impresses fools only
1) Inflating it down requires that the deficit is below the amount at which the debt falls in real terms.
2) The deficit should be at a level which enables it to withstand shocks without ballooning out of control.
3) This implies (to me) that there should not be a structural deficit. As we've seen, this makes responding to a shock very painful.
4) Having a structural deficit, and moving to eliminate it, requires cuts. Period.
Game changer on three year old tweets - I think not.
Certainly not on the basis of the First Minister's Questions I have just seen on the Parliament programme when Sturgeon totally and comprehensively destroyed Dugdale (Murphy's Deputy) on that issue - and indeed on the difference between "austerity" (the reduction in borrowing) and "public spending" over the next financial period.
Cut me in half on Ukip over 3.5 at 5/4 and didn't move the price then allowed me £0 when I asked for £100 on a 6/4 Ukip shot
Shoddy
The Tax Free Allowance increase has to be the most economically illiterate act of any government in my lifetime. Not to mention the moral impact on so many more people getting representation without (income) taxation.
And there is something disturbing about a system wherein, since 2005, the majority of those who vote elect no-one...